This is the place for agorists, mutualists, voluntaryists, geolibertarians, left-Rothbardians, individualist anarchists, green libertarians, libertarian socialists, radical minarchists, and others on the Libertarian Left to discuss theory, history, and how to smash the state. Registration is fast, simple, and free, so join the revolution today!

“Intellectual property” is no more genuine property than the “social contract” is a genuine contract. Calling IP as "a type of property" is like calling rape as "a type of love". - myself(english is not my native language, sorry for grammar.)

I don't personally have a problem with porn.It becomes degrading when the man or woman is being forced to do something they wouldn't generally do,or because of a dour economic situation.

The link I'm going to provide is from a blog I read from time to time,a good syndicalist blog.Its a five or six part post exploring anarcha-feminism,this is from the third post and I pretty much agree with all of it.

Birthday Pony wrote:I only wonder where the line is drawn. Some sex-positive thinkers say there's erotica which is just sexual art or representation and then there's pornography which is inherently degrading. Interestingly, the porno- prefix comes from a Greek word which means prostitute, not sex. So perhaps it is the wage slavery involved that is at the root of its degrading connotations, but that could just be one big old confirmation bias.

I find sex-positive theory to be unconvincing (along with the positive-negative dichotomy. I mean really?) because it usually lacks any real deep institutional thought. They just can't fathom how even a woman making her own video, just masturbating, can still perpetuate patriarchy because the world still views her as part of the sex class. When I see people taking the sex-positive side, they almost never consider it to be something that men won't have access to. Men (speaking institutionally from a class theory perspective here) aren't going to give up power because they see a bunch of "good" porn on the market. It's not fucking revolutionary. Sorry.

A positive and scientific morality, we have said, can give the individual this commandment only: Develop your life in all directions, be an "individual" as rich as possible in intensive and extensive energy; therefore be the most social and sociable being. (Jean-Marie Guyau)If you can read this, you are the resistance.

Birthday Pony wrote:I only wonder where the line is drawn. Some sex-positive thinkers say there's erotica which is just sexual art or representation and then there's pornography which is inherently degrading. Interestingly, the porno- prefix comes from a Greek word which means prostitute, not sex. So perhaps it is the wage slavery involved that is at the root of its degrading connotations, but that could just be one big old confirmation bias.

I find sex-positive theory to be unconvincing (along with the positive-negative dichotomy. I mean really?) because it usually lacks any real deep institutional thought. They just can't fathom how even a woman making her own video, just masturbating, can still perpetuate patriarchy because the world still views her as part of the sex class. When I see people taking the sex-positive side, they almost never consider it to be something that men won't have access to. Men (speaking institutionally from a class theory perspective here) aren't going to give up power because they see a bunch of "good" porn on the market. It's not fucking revolutionary. Sorry.

neverfox wrote:I find sex-positive theory to be unconvincing (along with the positive-negative dichotomy. I mean really?) because it usually lacks any real deep institutional thought. They just can't fathom how even a woman making her own video, just masturbating, can still perpetuate patriarchy because the world still views her as part of the sex class. When I see people taking the sex-positive side, they almost never consider it to be something that men won't have access to. Men (speaking institutionally from a class theory perspective here) aren't going to give up power because they see a bunch of "good" porn on the market. It's not fucking revolutionary. Sorry.

I think that's a very valid point, and I think you're mostly right in that making porn isn't revolutionary because, quite honestly, even "good" porn isn't going to alter the way men look at the women on film. Seeing anti-authoritarian porn would still be a spectator/spectacle relationship.

Still, I wonder how much of these arguments (and I'm not referring to yours) are rooted in some kind of puritanical "woman is holy" line of thought. I don't know enough about the history of sex to make an argument either way, and what I do know certainly helps support the prominent "domination through sex" idea.

Basically, I like sex. Most people I know like sex. It's probably about as revolutionary as eating your favorite food, no matter what way you spin it.

well surely part of the sex positive thing is "who are you to tell me what is revolutionary ' what is perpetuating patriarchy?" and if ok so every porn is perpetuating patriarchy how is that not just an academic form of slut-shaming? & is a gal w/make up and a tight dress on guilty too? what about me if I look at her ass?

ctmummey wrote:well surely part of the sex positive thing is "who are you to tell me what is revolutionary ' what is perpetuating patriarchy?" and if ok so every porn is perpetuating patriarchy how is that not just an academic form of slut-shaming? & is a gal w/make up and a tight dress on guilty too? what about me if I look at her ass?

Another valid point.

I'm not saying that every porn perpetuates patriarchy, but that it (most likely) doesn't challenge it. Even the Anarchist porn out there is pretty straight forward as porn.

Claire K. wrote:Part of the problem is that sex-positive feminists always seem to be reacting to radical feminists, and radical feminists are usually reacting to normative forms of heterosexuality. As a result, sex-positive writings usually say more about how normative forms of heterosexuality can be empowering than about how damaging it is when that sexuality is forced on people or how empowering non-normative sexualities can be. That is, they support those sorts of conversation in theory, but in practice there’s no need to talk about it because they’re in agreement with radical feminists on those points so the rad-fems already have it covered. What this comes to in practice is that anytime someone tries to bring up old feminist saws like how the majority of women don’t orgasm from PIV intercourse alone, a bunch of sex-positive feminists jump in to relate, in graphic detail, how much they looooove PIV intercourse. There’s nothing wrong with loving PIV intercourse, but given that the dominant culture already accepts (and enforces) that as the only acceptable form of sexuality, I don’t think it really needs defending, and especially not defending with such enthusiasm that it drowns out conversations about alternatives.

(emphasis mine)

Likewise, there’s nothing wrong with loving being the subject of sexually-explicit photos or videos, sharing them or even making a living from it, "but given that the dominant culture already accepts (and enforces) that as the only acceptable form of" publically expressing female sexuality (to an audience that damn well better include men), "I don’t think it really needs defending, and especially not defending with such enthusiasm that it drowns out conversations about alternatives."

A positive and scientific morality, we have said, can give the individual this commandment only: Develop your life in all directions, be an "individual" as rich as possible in intensive and extensive energy; therefore be the most social and sociable being. (Jean-Marie Guyau)If you can read this, you are the resistance.

Even then you need to accept the limits of that approach as it's only relevant to a particular context. Hetero sexual freedom is only the norm for developed nations, and even then it's possible to find regions where it is not the norm for wimin to have sex outside of a marriage/committed monogomous relationship. Wimin outside of the developed world don't necessarily have the same kind of sexual freedom and in some may still be punished with ostracisism, isolation, rape, gang-rape, assault or murder for being a "harlot" or "loose woman". There are going to be different issues to be addressed.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. -Aesop

I'm not sure what that's a response to. I never intended to imply that het freedom was the norm; I was saying that "heterosexual intercourse the paradigm activity for all sexuality." That doesn't seem incompatible with what you're saying at all. In fact, it supports it. If you haven't read the opening of Intercourse, it's about Sophia Tolstoy.

A positive and scientific morality, we have said, can give the individual this commandment only: Develop your life in all directions, be an "individual" as rich as possible in intensive and extensive energy; therefore be the most social and sociable being. (Jean-Marie Guyau)If you can read this, you are the resistance.